Reservoir, Inc. v. Truesdell

Summarized by:

  • Court: Intellectual Property Archives
  • Area(s) of Law: Trademarks, Laches
  • Date Filed: 10-09-2013
  • Case #: No. 4:12-2756
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
  • LexisNexis Citation: 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145896
  • Westlaw Citation: 2013 WL 5574897
  • Full Text Opinion

Because the Lanham Act does not have a limitations period for filing claims of trademark infringement, the court used the statute of limitations for fraud because that was the "most analogous" Texas statute of limitations.

Opinion (Atlas J.): Reservoir Inc. ("Reservoir") brought suit against Truesdell ("Truesdell") for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act for use of the name "Rebels Honkey Tonk" for a restaurant. Reservoir had filed for the trademark of "Rebels Honkey Tonk" in September 2009. In February 2012, Truesdell sent a cease and desist letter to Reservoir to stop using the name "Rebels Honkey Tonk." Reservoir refused and informed Truesdell that it held the trademark to the name "Rebels Honkey Tonk" and request that Truesdell to discontinue using "Rebels Honkey Tonk." Truesdell refused and Reservoir sued claiming trademark infringement. Truesdell presented equitable defenses of laches, waiver, and estoppel. Truesdell's laches claim alleged unreasonable delay because Reservoir brought the claim 33 months after Truesdell opened the restaurant. Because the Lanham Act has no limitations period, the court used the statute of limitations for fraud because it was the "most analogous" Texas statute of limitations. Because the Texas statute for fraud is longer than 33 months, Reservoir's motion for summary judgement was GRANTED in relevant part.

Advanced Search